Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Philosophy
Philosophy
7 TYPES OF BIAS
i. Invisibility
Example:
In the age when racism was more prevalent, specifically prior 1960’s, textbooks
omitted information regarding the colored races from illustrations and narratives.
You find Tina’s personality annoying, and sadly, you both have the same social
circle. So, whenever you find the chance, you leave her out of events and
conversations.
ii. Stereotyping
Example:
Racism - Asians are always smart, Black people are dangerous and violent
Example:
iv. Unreality
it is the tendency to gloss over vital information for the sake of forcing a false or
incomplete narrative/conclusion.
Example:
The notion that technology will resolve persistent social problems, or that
vaccines causes autism.
Example:
Example:
This bias is an "illusion of equity” that suggests that a text is bias free. Beyond the
attractive covers, photos, or posters, bias persists. This is a marketing strategy to
give a favorable impression to potential purchasers who only judge a book by its
cover.
Example:
An advertisement of a big and meaty burger, only for the actual product to be a
lesser version of it.
METHODS OF PHILOSOPHY
examine a claim
establish an argument
repeat 2 & 3
arrive at aporia
The end goal of this method is to reach aporia, a state of puzzlement where both
agree on the fact that their argument is invalid.
"I know that I know nothing"; wisdom is knowing the scope of what he doesn't know.
Hegelian Dialectic
Both thesis and antithesis contains part of the truth, but also exaggerations of the
whole, and so need to clash to produce a polished result
Unlike Plato's Dialectic where a clash of antithesis results into nothingness, Hegel
proposes that it will in fact, be the drive to bring out a new thesis that will
eventually lead to synthesis. Progress is not lost, all sides have some truth, to be
sifted by time.
CRITERIA IN EVALUATING ARGUEMENTS (FELT criteria)
1. Fairness
Is the argument fair and balanced, or does it contain bias? Bias can be detected by
asking the following questions:
Is the argument one-sided? Are there alternative points of view not addressed?
What are the implications of this narrowness?
2. Evidence
Are there any evidences to support the argument? Are they valid enough to be
considered?
Are the given premises reliable and relevant? Are they thoroughly explained?
3. Logic
Does the author make concessions to alternative views without explaining why they
are nevertheless subordinate to his/her main view?
Do the premises themselves require further justification? (That is, do they beg the
question?)
Is the movement from premise to conclusion logical? Does the argument contain gaps
in reasoning or logical fallacies?
4. Tone
Is the attitude of the writer appropriate for the content? For example, is it too
serious? Is it too sarcastic or dismissive? Is it overly dramatic? (Tone can reinforce
bias.)
Theories Of Human Composition
Human is a biological term. You are human if you have human DNA.
What must one possess to be a part of our moral community, to be deserving of our
moral consideration?
Genetic Criterion
You are a person if you have human dna, and if you don't you are not human.
1. Consciousness
2. Reasoning
3. Self-motivated activity
4. capacity to communicate
5. self-awareness
Social Criterion